Animals Honestly Advertise Toxicity

Creatures that don't produce toxin can look like they do, but poisonous critters can't look innocent, because of biochemistry. Karen Hopkin reports

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

[The following is an exact transcript of this podcast.]

Truth in advertising is a questionable concept, because it’s often self-serving to lie. Whether you’re talking about a used car salesman or a poisonous snake. No, they’re not the same thing.

In the natural world there are poisonous creatures that advertise their unpalatability with bright colors. Then there are other critters that try to protect themselves by merely mimicking the bright coloration of creatures that produce nasty toxins—but without actually expending the energy on making the toxins themselves. These mimics are hoping to get by by lying about being a bad meal. But what about the beasties that really are filled with poison. Can they lie, too? Maybe save a little energy by producing a less colorful display?

Well, scientists from the U.K. say, it looks like they can’t. See, when an animal makes a toxin, it also makes an antitoxin to keep it from poisoning itself. And those antitoxins are usually antioxidants, which also double as pigments. So the more toxic a critter is, the more antioxidants it needs, and the more honestly flamboyant its outfit, results published by the Royal Society on November 19th. So next time you run into a yellow-banded poison dart frog, remember, what you see is what you get.

—Karen Hopkin 


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


60-Second Science is a daily podcast. Subscribe to this Podcast:

RSS | iTunes 

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe